Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s alleged failure to fund care. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation and any investigation will not lead to a different outcome

The complaint

1. Ms X, who is complaining on behalf of Mr Y, says the Council:

• refused to keep the agreement it made in February 2020 to backdate funding for Mr Y’s care from November 2018. It has also refused to fund his current care; and
• changed the dates for assessments at the last minute leaving his representatives little chance to attend meetings and failed to answer phone calls. Ms X says this led to charges being incurred for advocacy support to manage issues that should not have been required.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome,

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A (6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr Y and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Any provision for care is subject to a financial assessment.
6. The Council says it has tried to arrange this at least three times but Mr Y’s deputy has not given consent.
7. Ms X has confirmed Mr Y’s deputy has failed to return the financial assessment documents.
8. Therefore, there is not enough evidence of Council fault to warrant an investigation.
9. I appreciate Ms X’s argument the Council should still have backdated the care funding to 2018. However, an assessment still needs to be done to ensure Mr Y is entitled to this.
10. The Council has apologised for any misunderstanding and says the social workers who would have agreed to the back dated payments were not authorised to do so. It has also apologised for failure to respond to correspondence.
11. The Covid 19 pandemic has also added pressure to Councils. This would have undoubtedly led to cancellation of meetings and failure to respond to correspondence.
12. As a result, any investigation into these matters would not lead to a different outcome.
13. Any charges Mr Y has had to pay for advocacy support is a matter for his appointed deputy.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation and an investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman